Random Blindfold Cubing Discussion

[amostay2004]

lol I suck at coming up with names. Personally I would just say 'rushing', but it doesn't sound elegant enough If anyone could come up with a good name it would probably be you Chris

I think a good way to look at BLD pacing is to separate memo into 2 elements: the actual memo part where you trace the pieces and come up with the letters/sounds/etc, and the 'playing safe' part where you do reviews and whatever that helps avoid DNFs. I believe it is impractical to be just doing fast one-look memo without reviewing at all (unless fast memo-ers like aronpm and Ville can testify that they don't review memo at all?).

Now everyone should eventually aim to go full speed on the actual memo part once they practise enough. The difference between super-fast memo and fast memo, therefore, is how much time you spend on making your memo safe enough. So the basic concept behind GOGOGO BLD is to rush both the elements; go as fast as you can during the actual memo, and constantly strive to decrease the time needed for playing safe. Correct me if I'm wrong, but the idea of a synergistic pace seems to suggest that you have a slight level of comfort in memo. This should not exist in a GOGOGO pace. You should be on the edge during the entire BLD solve, rushing both the memo and review part. So I guess you can say 100% GOGOGO is ideal if you acknowledge that the 2 elements must always exist, therefore 100% GOGOGO in both memo and review (which is what I think I'm doing).

Yes I do agree that pacing is very much part of the BLD method, and a Wiki entry would be nice.

 

[cmhardw]

lol I suck at coming up with names. Personally I would just say 'rushing', but it doesn't sound elegant enough If anyone could come up with a good name it would probably be you Chris

I think this should be a group effort, as many people use GOGOGO pacing, and I don't want to impose a name on a group of people when I'm not really using the method as it is meant to be used.

I think a good way to look at BLD pacing is to separate memo into 2 elements: the actual memo part where you trace the pieces and come up with the letters/sounds/etc, and the 'playing safe' part where you do reviews and whatever that helps avoid DNFs. I believe it is impractical to be just doing fast one-look memo without reviewing at all (unless fast memo-ers like aronpm and Ville can testify that they don't review memo at all?).

Yes reviewing is a part of my memo phase, but I will clarify how further down. Also, more comments on this idea below.

Now everyone should eventually aim to go full speed on the actual memo part once they practise enough. The difference between super-fast memo and fast memo, therefore, is how much time you spend on making your memo safe enough. So the basic concept behind GOGOGO BLD is to rush both the elements; go as fast as you can during the actual memo, and constantly strive to decrease the time needed for playing safe. Correct me if I'm wrong, but the idea of a synergistic pace seems to suggest that you have a slight level of comfort in memo. This should not exist in a GOGOGO pace. You should be on the edge during the entire BLD solve, rushing both the memo and review part. So I guess you can say 100% GOGOGO is ideal if you acknowledge that the 2 elements must always exist, therefore 100% GOGOGO in both memo and review (which is what I think I'm doing).

If I were to refine synergistic BLD with the concept of encoding the memo (your first phase), and reviewing the memo (your second phase) then I would say this:

In synergistic pacing:
1) Phase one encoding must feel completely secure. Your post asks if I have a slight level of comfort during memo, it's more like a 90-95% confidence that I've not only memorized correctly, but that I will recall it at speed during solving. Nearly complete level of comfort would be a better statement here.

In practice, during encoding, you will speed up and slow down as much as is necessary to memo "solidly." I can either be going 99% speed at this phase for memo images that stuck very easily, or I can be going 30% pace when I am tired or doing a distraction practice solve. The pace is constantly changing up and down, as your comfort with certain images even in the same solve varies drastically. A typical memo in a piece orbit like wings might be like this:

Start out at 60-65% pace for the first image, then increase to 85-90% pace for the second and third images... Get a feel for how things are sticking... Ok easy memo so far - back it off a bit to 85% pace to make sure the second location is solid, but still fast. Fly through the second location... whoa too fast slow down to 65-70% memo on the third location and stay at this pace for a while... Hover at 70% memo starting the 4th location... getting easier again speed up to 85% ... Halt, slow down. Memo is not sticking for this last location, and I don't know why - slow down to 30% memo until this spot sticks.. Ok I've got this 4th location down solidly speed back up to 75% pace to begin corner memo at a fairly brisk pace.

2) Phase 2 is rushed as close to 100% as possible, or in places it is non-existent.

Since I've encoded so solidly I usually only review the first location of each piece type (5BLD) or on a REALLY good solve I only review the first location of centers, and then corners and central edges. This means that on a very fast solve (low sub-11 or sub-10) I am not reviewing anything of centers or wings except for the first location of t-centers. I always review the corners and central edges multiple times no matter how fast the memo, perhaps 2-3 times each.

So I guess synergistic pacing aims for slowing down the encoding phase such that the reviewing phase can always be at 100%, and in some places be non-existent. Perhaps that is a more accurate way to define what my pacing is.

Yes I do agree that pacing is very much part of the BLD method, and a Wiki entry would be nice.

I do as well, we already have a lot of theory here even in just the last few posts. Does anyone else have anything to add to make this information more complete? Also, any more specific name suggestions for GOGOGO done at 80-90% pace, or GOGOGO such that you can rush through encoding and reviewing phases of memo as quickly as possible? GOGOGO to me implies 100% pace the whole time, with no concessions in speed. However, if most people are using it to imply that some concessions would be allowed on occasion then we can just choose to define it that way.

Let's keep this discussion going, this is interesting stuff!

 

[RyanReese09]

I don't review my memo on single 3bld. I only review it or question my memo if the buffer edge will end flipped (during memo I'll notice any solved pieces or flipped) or if during corners, the corner buffer piece ends up twisted.

I just memo and go.

I wouldn't call it gogogo since I could go faster, but the likelyhood of me not remembering my memo fully (edges mainly) is a high risk (had sub25 memo before with no review+full out pace. DNF though because I couldn't remember parts of my memo)


I do quite like the idea of synergistic and I think most people, subconsciously or not, memo this way (especially for multi or big cube BLD.) I know I do. No point trying to rush through a memo that has a high chance of not being recallable just to get a good time, especially on a time consuming event such as multi or big cube BLD. Per day you do less of them (if at all over 1)

 

[amostay2004]

@Chris: You're talking more about big cube BLD memo I suppose? I know that in 4bld I would review the memo as I am still memo-ing and also be extra sure that I memo-ed the right pieces and that I will be able to refresh them easily after I'm done. But in 3x3 single BLD is it necessary to spend the extra time to strengthen your encoding phase that much? I almost never make mistakes in tracing the pieces and I don't bother about being confident that I will be able to remember the letters as I memo them. What I care about during the encoding phase is simply to get it done as fast as possible, then leave it to the review phase to put it into memory. Therefore phase 2 can never be non-existent for me, because the information simply doesn't stick if I don't do it.

I would agree that your synergistic pace is extremely effective in big cubes BLD though, I've tried rushing memo on 4BLD myself and I just end up slower ;P

 

[cmhardw]

@Chris: You're talking more about big cube BLD memo I suppose? I know that in 4bld I would review the memo as I am still memo-ing and also be extra sure that I memo-ed the right pieces and that I will be able to refresh them easily after I'm done. But in 3x3 single BLD is it necessary to spend the extra time to strengthen your encoding phase that much? I almost never make mistakes in tracing the pieces and I don't bother about being confident that I will be able to remember the letters as I memo them.

Yeah, I've noticed this as well. It seems that synergistic pacing is very useful on bigger cubes BLD, but not as much on 3x3x3. I've gotten a 1:06.xx single on 3BLD using synergistic pacing (but probably at an overall average of 80-85% on pacing rather than 75-80% as on bigger cubes).

I find it fascinating, frustrating, motivating, and infuriating that 3x3x3 BLD is so very different from bigger cubes BLD Based on everything we've discussed so far, I'm thinking that if synergistic pacing is used on 3x3x3 (encode so strongly that the reviewing phase is minimal, and in places non-existent) that I should be moving at a much more brisk overall average pace than on bigger cubes. This makes sense since there is less to memo on a 3x3x3 compared to a bigger cube.

What I care about during the encoding phase is simply to get it done as fast as possible, then leave it to the review phase to put it into memory. Therefore phase 2 can never be non-existent for me, because the information simply doesn't stick if I don't do it.

I really want to try this approach on my GOGOGO solves. To be more specific I have been trying to use the method presented in the "How to break past plateaus" article that was posted here recently. Occasionally I do solves on a cube and go way faster than I usually do. At the pace I go I am no longer as confident in my memo, and I also solve at a pace a bit faster than I am accustomed to. This often results in a DNF. As per the article, though, I do a much more thorough post-mortem than usual to identify why I failed the solve. I may try to use the pacing you suggest here when going super-fast on 3x3x3, and accompany it with a solid post-mortem afterward (or get lucky and get a fast, successful single).

I would agree that your synergistic pace is extremely effective in big cubes BLD though, I've tried rushing memo on 4BLD myself and I just end up slower ;P

I am quite happy with it for bigger cubes. Each cube has a different overall pace, and it slows down as the cube size gets larger. I suppose that makes sense since there is more to memo as the cube size increases.

The following paces are all during the encoding phase. Reviewing phase is always as breakneck fast as possible.
4x4x4 average overall pace feels like 80-85%
5x5x5 average overall pace feels like 75-80%

6x6x6 average overall pace feels like 65-70% (to be fair I am still trying to figure out an optimal pace for this cube for me)
- for the reviewing phase I reviewing every center location at the end of encoding for all centers, and before beginning the encoding phase for wings. I also review every wing location at the end of encoding wings.

7x7x7 average overall pace feels like 50-60% (to be fair I am still trying to figure out an optimal pace for this cube for me)
- for the reviewing phase I reviewing every t-center location at the end of encoding, and I review every center location (including t-centers again) at the end of encoding for all centers and before beginning the encoding phase for wings. I also review every wing location, corners, and midges, at the end of encoding for the whole solve. I then review the very first t-center location (the very beginning of memo) immediately before putting on the blindfold.

Mike would probably say that I do waaaaaay too much reviewing on 6x6x6 and 7x7x7, and I would agree with him. I'm trying to get to the point where I can cut down on the reviewing phase for these cubes. I suppose you could say that I'm technically not using synergistic pacing on these cubes yet, as the reviewing phase is very significant for me right now on both cubes.

 

[Mike Hughey]

Mike would probably say that I do waaaaaay too much reviewing on 6x6x6 and 7x7x7, and I would agree with him. I'm trying to get to the point where I can cut down on the reviewing phase for these cubes. I suppose you could say that I'm technically not using synergistic pacing on these cubes yet, as the reviewing phase is very significant for me right now on both cubes.

Yes, I probably would. And I think you would say I do too much reviewing on 4x4x4. I basically have a very similar "synergistic" interaction with the cubes, no matter how big they get. For something like a 7x7x7 multi, I probably drop like you do on a 7x7x7 single, though, so it seems like eventually I have the same behavior, but it just takes a bigger case for me to get there. I wonder what it would be like for me on 9x9x9 or 11x11x11.

 

[Zane_C]

Has anyone here done a 5BLD avg12?
I don't mean in the one sitting, just 12 consecutive attempts with a maximum of 1 DNF.

 

[cmhardw]

Has anyone here done a 5BLD avg12?
I don't mean in the one sitting, just 12 consecutive attempts with a maximum of 1 DNF.

Whoa... I just looked and yeah, I have.

My week 14 forum competition solves and my first four solves for week 15 were all done consecutively with no other practice solves in between:

13:38.54, 14:38.86, 11:23.59, 14:19.32, 13:04.65, 12:55.25, 14:46.77, 13:33.96, (10:49.75), 11:11.49, 11:50.27, (DNF) = 13:08.27

My last solve just before week 14 was a DNF, I checked. It would have been cool to get 12 successes in a row

 

[Zane_C]

Whoa... I just looked and yeah, I have.

My week 14 forum competition solves and my first four solves for week 15 were all done consecutively with no other practice solves in between:

13:38.54, 14:38.86, 11:23.59, 14:19.32, 13:04.65, 12:55.25, 14:46.77, 13:33.96, (10:49.75), 11:11.49, 11:50.27, (DNF) = 13:08.27

My last solve just before week 14 was a DNF, I checked. It would have been cool to get 12 successes in a row

Woah, that is very impressive! :tu

 

[riffz]

Chris is a beast.

 

[Mike Hughey]

Whoa... I just looked and yeah, I have.

My week 14 forum competition solves and my first four solves for week 15 were all done consecutively with no other practice solves in between:

13:38.54, 14:38.86, 11:23.59, 14:19.32, 13:04.65, 12:55.25, 14:46.77, 13:33.96, (10:49.75), 11:11.49, 11:50.27, (DNF) = 13:08.27

My last solve just before week 14 was a DNF, I checked. It would have been cool to get 12 successes in a row

Very nice! I was thinking you might have done it when I saw the 8 in one week.

 

[rubiksarlen]

random bld questions

hey cubers just wanted to ask some quesetions:

1) what method do u use for bld solving?

2) what do u average using that method?

3) what's the fastest possible u think sum1 can get using that method?

4) what method do u recommend for bld solving?

 

[Cubenovice]

Looking forward to the responses on this one...

 

[aronpm]

1: BH/Freestyle
2: Sub-40 (but I quit)
3: Sub-25 average is possible but I'm not sure if sub-20 average is.
4: M2/Old Pochmann for beginners

 

[Zane_C]

1) Edges: (BH/Freestyle/TuRBo), Corners: (BH/OP)
2) Inconsistently around 1:00, however it does seem to be mostly over 1 minute.
3) Sub-40 average.
4) Old Pochmann for the beginners, speed-optimised comms to be a lot faster.

 

[Micael]

1) M2/R2
2) 2:00
3) 0:50
4) M2/R2 for multi, for single I don't know

 

[Mike Hughey]

1) BH with some M2 mixed in for edges
2) 1:45 average (I like to think I average 1:30, but realistically, it's more like 1:45)
3) 0:30 average (I'm just slow - it's my fault, not the method's)
4) Old Pochmann for beginners, followed immediately by BH, using something like Chester's approach to learning the algs

 

[amostay2004]

1) Freestyle (3 cycles without preorientation etc)
2) Sub-50 I guess
3) With crazy tps and memo I'd say consistently 25-35
4) Ville-method

 

[Yes We Can!]

1) Edges: M2; Corners: Old Pochmann

2) ~1:00

3) 35-40 avg

4) BH

 

[Elbeasto94]

1) edges:M2 Corners: Old Pochmann

2)5-6min

3)sub 1 min

4)other people know better than me